I've always felt that the Spark team was extremely responsive to PRs and I've been very impressed over the past year with your output. As Matei said, probably the best thing to do here is to be more diligent about closing PRs that are old/abandoned so that every PR is active. Whenever I comment I try to make it clear who has the next action to get the PR merged.
I definitely don't want you to think that I'm critiquing the process! The reason I brought this up in the first place was because I thought we were about to lose a contributor because something fell through the cracks, which would be unfortunate. On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 6:32 PM, Patrick Wendell <pwend...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey Andrew, > > Indeed, sometimes there are patches that sit around a while and in > this case it can be because it's unclear to the reviewers whether they > are features worth having - or just by accident. > > To put things in perspective, Spark merges about 80% of the proposed > patches (if you look we are on around 600 since moving to the new repo > with 100 not merged) - so in general we try hard to be very supportive > of community patches, much more than other projects in this space. > > - Patrick > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Matei Zaharia <matei.zaha...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Thanks for bringing this up. One issue that makes this harder is that > old inactive PRs on GitHub are not really getting closed, so active ones > might be lost between those. For now please just post on the dev list if > your PR is being ignored. We'll implement some kind of cleanup (at least > manually) to close the old ones. > > > > Matei > > > > On Feb 24, 2014, at 1:30 PM, Andrew Ash <and...@andrewash.com> wrote: > > > >> Yep that's the one thanks! That's quite a few more people than I thought > >> > >> Sent from my mobile phone > >> On Feb 24, 2014 1:20 PM, "Nan Zhu" <zhunanmcg...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Do you mean this > >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SPARK/Committers? > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Nan Zhu > >>> > >>> > >>> On Monday, February 24, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Andrew Ash wrote: > >>> > >>>> Would love to have a discussion since I know the core contributors are > >>>> facing a barrage of PRs and things are falling through the cracks. > >>>> > >>>> Is there a list of who can commit to core Spark somewhere? Maybe that > >>> list > >>>> should be expanded or there should be a rotation of PR duty of some > sort. > >>>> > >>>> One of the perils of having a vibrant, organic community is that you > get > >>>> way more contributions than you expected! > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Nan Zhu <zhunanmcg...@gmail.com > (mailto: > >>> zhunanmcg...@gmail.com)> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> yet another email about forgotten PR > >>>>> > >>>>> I think Sean would like to start some discussion on the current > >>> situation > >>>>> where committers are facing a flood of PRs recently (as he said in > the > >>>>> discussion thread about how to prevent the blob of RDD API)? > >>>>> > >>>>> Best, > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Nan Zhu > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Monday, February 24, 2014 at 4:07 PM, Andrew Ash wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Hi Spark devs, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Kyle identified a deficiency in Spark where generating iterators are > >>>>>> unrolled into memory and then flushed to disk rather than sent > >>> straight > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> to > >>>>>> disk when possible. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> He's had a patch sitting ready for code review for quite some time > >>> now > >>>>> (100 > >>>>>> days) but no response. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Is this something that an admin would be able to review? I for one > >>> would > >>>>>> find this quite valuable. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks! > >>>>>> Andrew > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> https://spark-project.atlassian.net/browse/SPARK-942 > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pull/180 > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > >
